For Flanders, all matters related to agriculture come within the scope of the
regional authorities, apart from food safety, which is still a federal Belgium policy
area. In the form it takes in Flanders agricultural policy which is essentially
European based. At this level Flanders is able to shape its policy in the light of what
is decided by the EU authorities. Drought is seen as a problem by some farmers but
the uptake of the problem by different political level starts slowly. The regional
Flemish environment agency (VMM) starts to implement some initiatives and
measures, but provinces and municipalities have still a limited awareness of the
potential problem. Beside this, provinces and municipalities include the possible
consequences on agriculture and other economic activities in their decision-making.
In general, both levels work closely together.
The two main actors that play an important role in the water management regime
at the Eifel-Rur area are the water board (WVER) and the district government. The
water users with a water right of a certain size are automatically members of the
water board in the area. However, smaller actors such as farmers do not have the
same voice because they are not water board members. During the implementation
of the Water Framework Directive (WFD), a large stakeholder process was organized by the region’s water board. Therefore, the actors that are not involved as
water board’s members are also integrated in the discussions and seem to be quite
satisfied with the participatory process. Since, agriculture is a relevant economic
activity in the downstream areas of the Rur basin, the farmers as a stakeholder
group are in a position to impose their own agenda to a great extent. There seems to
be a reluctance to collaborate with water management objectives (e.g. when measures do not coincide with agriculture aims). For instance, municipalities with
strong farming presence would resist repurposing some areas of land for WFD
Programmes of Measures, although the legal basis is clearly against them. Also for
drought-related measures this kind of deadlocks can appear.
In the Netherlands, thus for the Salland and the Twente regions, a broad range
of governance levels are relevant, whereas the regional level is the most prominent
one due to the role of water authorities at this level. Through designing an irrigation
policy, the five water authorities were successful in developing a common regulation at the regional level. Other regional actors were also invited by the water
authorities. However, the LTO and NMO, the respective representatives of individual farmers and local nature conservation organizations, were not able to
effectively participate. The development process of the irrigation policy constitutes
a typical example of upscaling where the irrigation issue was scaled up from the
local level to the regional level. Additionally, the EU level creates pressure on the
water boards to work together. According to the WFD, all these water boards are in
the Rhine-East and they need to collaborate on water planning and management, of
which irrigation management constitutes a significant component. The fact that the
water boards have a history of maintaining good relations creates additional
impetus regarding the enforcement of the irrigation policy.
Two national measures in the Netherlands also have regional and local implications for agriculture. A national agreement foresees that water from the rivers can
210
G. Özerol and J. Troeltzsch
regional authorities, apart from food safety, which is still a federal Belgium policy
area. In the form it takes in Flanders agricultural policy which is essentially
European based. At this level Flanders is able to shape its policy in the light of what
is decided by the EU authorities. Drought is seen as a problem by some farmers but
the uptake of the problem by different political level starts slowly. The regional
Flemish environment agency (VMM) starts to implement some initiatives and
measures, but provinces and municipalities have still a limited awareness of the
potential problem. Beside this, provinces and municipalities include the possible
consequences on agriculture and other economic activities in their decision-making.
In general, both levels work closely together.
The two main actors that play an important role in the water management regime
at the Eifel-Rur area are the water board (WVER) and the district government. The
water users with a water right of a certain size are automatically members of the
water board in the area. However, smaller actors such as farmers do not have the
same voice because they are not water board members. During the implementation
of the Water Framework Directive (WFD), a large stakeholder process was organized by the region’s water board. Therefore, the actors that are not involved as
water board’s members are also integrated in the discussions and seem to be quite
satisfied with the participatory process. Since, agriculture is a relevant economic
activity in the downstream areas of the Rur basin, the farmers as a stakeholder
group are in a position to impose their own agenda to a great extent. There seems to
be a reluctance to collaborate with water management objectives (e.g. when measures do not coincide with agriculture aims). For instance, municipalities with
strong farming presence would resist repurposing some areas of land for WFD
Programmes of Measures, although the legal basis is clearly against them. Also for
drought-related measures this kind of deadlocks can appear.
In the Netherlands, thus for the Salland and the Twente regions, a broad range
of governance levels are relevant, whereas the regional level is the most prominent
one due to the role of water authorities at this level. Through designing an irrigation
policy, the five water authorities were successful in developing a common regulation at the regional level. Other regional actors were also invited by the water
authorities. However, the LTO and NMO, the respective representatives of individual farmers and local nature conservation organizations, were not able to
effectively participate. The development process of the irrigation policy constitutes
a typical example of upscaling where the irrigation issue was scaled up from the
local level to the regional level. Additionally, the EU level creates pressure on the
water boards to work together. According to the WFD, all these water boards are in
the Rhine-East and they need to collaborate on water planning and management, of
which irrigation management constitutes a significant component. The fact that the
water boards have a history of maintaining good relations creates additional
impetus regarding the enforcement of the irrigation policy.
Two national measures in the Netherlands also have regional and local implications for agriculture. A national agreement foresees that water from the rivers can
210
G. Özerol and J. Troeltzsch